Ant-Man The Official Ant-Man News and Speculation Thread - Part 2

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Dang just saw the news, that is def not the news I was expecting regarding this film. Hopefully Marvel can get it back on track ASAP and it still delivers on the goods. Hoping we aren't running into another IM2 fiasco

 

[Loki882]

I think that it sounds closer to what happened with TDW (creative differences pushed several directors away from the project). IM 2 just had the problem of cramming a lot of set up for future stuff into the actual narrative, at the cost of weakening said narrative.

 

[Crimson King]

I think that it sounds closer to what happened with TDW (creative differences pushed several directors away from the project). IM 2 just had the problem of cramming a lot of set up for future stuff into the actual narrative, at the cost of weakening said narrative.

Several? Who besides Patty Jenkins was pushed away/let go?

 

[KDM1986]

I think that it sounds closer to what happened with TDW (creative differences pushed several directors away from the project). IM 2 just had the problem of cramming a lot of set up for future stuff into the actual narrative, at the cost of weakening said narrative.

I'm only aware of the first director they had lined up and she said they hoped to work on a different film together. Alan Taylor replaced her and made the film.

 

[babykhris]

No one seems to answer the following question. Besides Wright as director were you even excited about an Ant-Man film?

When Age of Ultron was announced all I heard was complaining because Pym wasn't in it. That was done so Wright could tell his origin story.

I say scrap Ant-Man and give us a film we care about like Dr Strange.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I think that it sounds closer to what happened with TDW (creative differences pushed several directors away from the project). IM 2 just had the problem of cramming a lot of set up for future stuff into the actual narrative, at the cost of weakening said narrative.

I thought the narrative was fine for the most part. They just short-changed Vanko.

It's funny because we celebrate the interactivity of the MCU now, but for some reason people continue to ***** about IM2. It's not on my top tier MCU movies but it wasn't doing anything we're not seeing now. CA:TWS had just as many characters, if not more and that movie was gold.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

No one seems to answer the following question. Besides Wright as director were you even excited about an Ant-Man film?

Yes. I've been droning on to anyone who would listen about what awesome adventure movie potential Ant-Man has for almost a decade. I wasn't completely happy with the focus on Lang but even that was never a dealbreaker.

 

[Dr. Evil]

No one seems to answer the following question. Besides Wright as director were you even excited about an Ant-Man film?

When Age of Ultron was announced all I heard was complaining because Pym wasn't in it. That was done so Wright could tell his origin story.

I say scrap Ant-Man and give us a film we care about like Dr Strange.

I would not rush Dr. Strange by putting his film in the Ant Man date. I think Ant Man happens.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

yeah, it'll happen. It'll be moved back though unless this has all been happening for awhile and they've already found someone to replace Ed.

I mean I dunno, maybe some guy could jump aboard this week and still hit the schedule but one would think you'd need some time to bring yourself up to speed.

 

[Dr. Evil]

If the film is to be moved to November, the best suggestion would be to move the film to the week before James Bond 24.

 

[chamber-music]

No one seems to answer the following question. Besides Wright as director were you even excited about an Ant-Man film?

When Age of Ultron was announced all I heard was complaining because Pym wasn't in it. That was done so Wright could tell his origin story.

I say scrap Ant-Man and give us a film we care about like Dr Strange.

Doctor Strange is happening anyway. Ant-Man has no effect on that movie.

If your a Doctor Strange fan like me why would you want to see Marvel try and rush to put it out in a year to meet Ant-Man's current release date.

As far as we know Doctor Strange has no script ready to film, no director attached, no actors cast, no studio booked, no sets built, no crew hired and no locations scouted.

All Ant-Man lost was a director and possibly a one of the screenwriters. Ant-Man is still salvageable and may turn out to be successful still. Look at World War Z which had so many issues going wrong with it and people were sure it would bomb yet it turned out to be highly successful.

 

[Loki882]

I'm only aware of the first director they had lined up and she said they hoped to work on a different film together. Alan Taylor replaced her and made the film.

Kenneth Branagh left, and Brian Kirk was in negotiations before Jenkins.

 

[seahammer]

Kenneth Branagh left, and Brian Kirk was in negotiations before Jenkins.

I'm pretty sure Branagh was never going to do Thor 2.

 

[Loki882]

I thought the narrative was fine for the most part. They just short-changed Vanko.

It's funny because we celebrate the interactivity of the MCU now, but for some reason people continue to ***** about IM2. It's not on my top tier MCU movies but it wasn't doing anything we're not seeing now. CA:TWS had just as many characters, if not more and that movie was gold.

Because TWS had a much deeper/more compelling story and integrated the characters into the narrative better. It's the same reason why people prefer TWS over TASM 2, it did it better. They had like ten different plot-lines in IM 2 and as a result none of them got the development that they needed. The "legacy" theme was underdeveloped, both villains were underdeveloped because the movie couldn't decide which one to focus on. Black Widow was completely superfluous to the plot, she's only their to set her up for Avengers. Her actual role could have easily been filled by any random SHIELD agent and nothing would have changed, etc. I don't hate IM 2, and I can still watch it if it comes on. But it did have a lot of problems.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Because TWS had a much deeper/more compelling story and integrated the characters into the narrative better. It's the same reason why people prefer TWS over TASM 2, it did it better. They had like ten different plot-lines in IM 2 and as a result none of them got the development that they needed. The "legacy" theme was underdeveloped, both villains were underdeveloped because the movie couldn't decide which one to focus on. Black Widow was completely superfluous to the plot, she's only their to set her up for Avengers. Her actual role could have easily been filled by any random SHIELD agent and nothing would have changed, etc. I don't hate IM 2, and I can still watch it if it comes on. But it did have a lot of problems.

Ya, because any random SHIELD agent had her skill sets. Makes complete sense. That's what these films do btw, they set up characters for future movies when they alone can't hold down a solo franchise.

I know the story is better with CA:TWS, that is quite obvious .... but my point was about people complaining over the character inclusions. There was nothing wrong with any of them IMO, other than they left out better development of Vanko. If he had a much more satisfying finale in the movie vs. IM and WM nobody would be whining.

 

[Six]

We need to make a big stink about this. Everyone should take to twitter and show our support for Edgar, Joss, Kevin Feige and now Dred Goddard.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

And how would the movie have been any better if "Agent Romanoff" was a generic "Agent Jones" instead?

Because that's what the character was introduced as: a SHIELD agent. She wasn't the "Black Widow" (a name that wasn't even uttered in the movie), a big superheroine or a costumed character who demanded her own subplot. She was the person SHIELD assigned to monitor Tony while he was cracking under pressure.

That's why I have to disagree with the notion that IM2 was all just "setup" for the Avengers, or the criticism about Black Widow's inclusion.

It wasn't the most focused movie, and it certainly had multiple themes, villains, plot threads. However, these threads did eventually tie together, and they were the movie's own. It was a movie about the Stark legacy and whether it could hold up against various internal and external pressures. These things were all wrapped up by the end of the film, and had nothing to do with the Avengers.

It's a standalone movie that could have used some script polishing. I think online fans go too far in dismissing it by trying to sum all of it's flaws up into some kind of thoughtless effort to promote a future movie. An Avengers commercial it was not.

 

[babykhris]

We need to make a big stink about this. Everyone should take to twitter and show our support for Edgar, Joss, Kevin Feige and now Dred Goddard.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05...series/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Crimson King]

From James Gunn:

"Sometimes you have friends in a relationship. You love each of them dearly as individuals and think they're amazing people. When they talk to you about their troubles, you do everything you can to support them, to keep them together, because if you love them both so much doesn't it make sense they should love each other? But little by little you realize, at heart, they aren't meant to be together - not because there's anything wrong with either of them, but they just don't have personalities that mesh in a comfortable way. They don't make each other happy. Although it's sad to see them split, when they do, you're surprisingly relieved, and excited to see where their lives take them next.
It's easy to try to make one party "right" and another party "wrong" when a breakup happens, but it often isn't that simple. Or perhaps it's even more simple than that - not everyone belongs in a relationship together. It doesn't mean they're not wonderful people.

And that's true of both Edgar Wright and Marvel. One of them isn't a person, but I think you get what I mean."

 

[Whiskey Tango]

From James Gunn:

"Sometimes you have friends in a relationship. You love each of them dearly as individuals and think they're amazing people. When they talk to you about their troubles, you do everything you can to support them, to keep them together, because if you love them both so much doesn't it make sense they should love each other? But little by little you realize, at heart, they aren't meant to be together - not because there's anything wrong with either of them, but they just don't have personalities that mesh in a comfortable way. They don't make each other happy. Although it's sad to see them split, when they do, you're surprisingly relieved, and excited to see where their lives take them next.
It's easy to try to make one party "right" and another party "wrong" when a breakup happens, but it often isn't that simple. Or perhaps it's even more simple than that - not everyone belongs in a relationship together. It doesn't mean they're not wonderful people.

And that's true of both Edgar Wright and Marvel. One of them isn't a person, but I think you get what I mean."

Thank you, Mr. Gunn. Can we staple this to everyones forehead?

 

[Ant-manic]

From James Gunn:

"Sometimes you have friends in a relationship. You love each of them dearly as individuals and think they're amazing people. When they talk to you about their troubles, you do everything you can to support them, to keep them together, because if you love them both so much doesn't it make sense they should love each other? But little by little you realize, at heart, they aren't meant to be together - not because there's anything wrong with either of them, but they just don't have personalities that mesh in a comfortable way. They don't make each other happy. Although it's sad to see them split, when they do, you're surprisingly relieved, and excited to see where their lives take them next.
It's easy to try to make one party "right" and another party "wrong" when a breakup happens, but it often isn't that simple. Or perhaps it's even more simple than that - not everyone belongs in a relationship together. It doesn't mean they're not wonderful people.

And that's true of both Edgar Wright and Marvel. One of them isn't a person, but I think you get what I mean."

except, this is like the two "friends" deciding that they don't like one another after one of the friends reveals they are pregnant.

 

[Crimson King]

except, this is like the two "friends" deciding that they don't like one another after one of the friends reveals they are pregnant.

I'm not sure I follow, but then again I think you're assuming too much knowledge of the situation. It's likely that both sides have some blame in this. Either way, it's over, so here's hoping they can each move on successfully.

 

[Ant-manic]

I'm not sure I follow, but then again I think you're assuming too much knowledge of the situation. It's likely that both sides have some blame in this. Either way, it's over, so here's hoping they can each move on successfully.

what I'm saying is that one friend will be hurt more by the split-up. Wright will just go back to making movies his way. but now there's the perceived downgrade in quality for Ant-Man. many don't believe that they can find an equally talented replacement, in time to make the deadline. and, if they do, the quality will suffer.

 

[Quasimod0]

Well said Mr. Gunn

 

[Human Torch]

And how would the movie have been any better if "Agent Romanoff" was a generic "Agent Jones" instead?

Because that's what the character was introduced as: a SHIELD agent. She wasn't the "Black Widow" (a name that wasn't even uttered in the movie), a big superheroine or a costumed character who demanded her own subplot. She was the person SHIELD assigned to monitor Tony while he was cracking under pressure.

That's why I have to disagree with the notion that IM2 was all just "setup" for the Avengers, or the criticism about Black Widow's inclusion.

It wasn't the most focused movie, and it certainly had multiple themes, villains, plot threads. However, these threads did eventually tie together, and they were the movie's own. It was a movie about the Stark legacy and whether it could hold up against various internal and external pressures. These things were all wrapped up by the end of the film, and had nothing to do with the Avengers.

It's a standalone movie that could have used some script polishing. I think online fans go too far in dismissing it by trying to sum all of it's flaws up into some kind of thoughtless effort to promote a future movie. An Avengers commercial it was not.

I don't get the criticisms either,but that's the interwebs for ya.